December 10, 2006

That's the idea of UK Children's Minister Beverley Hughes -- who looks remarkably like Ross Perot in a wig:

Those who fail to read stories or sing to their youngsters threaten their children's future and the state must put them right, Children's Minister Beverley Hughes said.

Their children's well-being is at risk 'unless we act', she declared.

And Mrs Hughes said the state would train a new 'parenting workforce' to ensure parents who fail to do their duty with nursery rhymes are found and 'supported'.

Amusing quotes on "supported."

The call for state intervention in the minute details of family life followed a series of Labour efforts to reduce anti-social behaviour and improve educational standards by imposing rigorous controls on the lives of the youngest children.

Mrs Hughes has established a national curriculum to set down how babies are taught to speak in childcare from the age of three months.

Her efforts have gone alongside a push by other ministers to determine exactly how parents treat their children down to how they should brush their teeth.

Tony Blair has backed the idea of 'fasbos' - efforts to identify and correct the lives of children who are likely to fail even before they are born - and new laws to compel parents to attend parenting classes are on the way.

This autumn is likely to see an extension of parenting orders that can force parents to attend parenting classes so that they can be used on the say so of local councils against parents.

For the first time, parenting orders are likely to be directed against parents whose children have committed no criminal offence.

The threat of action against parents who fail to sing nursery rhymes was unveiled by Mrs Hughes as she gave the first details of Mr Blair's 'national parenting academy', a body that will train teachers, psychologists and social workers to intervene in the lives of families and become the 'parenting workforce'.

How utterly alien! That could never happen here, right?

I refrained from singing to my kids because I believed that I sang off key and that I would cause them to have a poor sense of pitch. Was I right or wrong? I don't know. But I used my judgment. I also refrained from playing children's songs after I got the idea that rock and roll songs from the 50s and 60s were kind of like children's songs but were much more appealing. I can just imagine how I would have flipped out if some government functionary had tried to instruct me that I was wrong.

Of course, the government agent would have no intellectual depth about what was good and bad and no ability to discuss it. She -- it would be a she, don't you think? -- would only insist that I follow the instructions. And if the day comes when the experts decide that children need to learn how to think for themselves, will there be anyone around who even knows how to do it?

One wonders which nursery rhymes the government will approve for use, which will have to be sanitized by a government committee, and which will cause the immediate incarceration of the parents should they be caught reciting them to their children.

Within a generation, the government will no doubt decide that parenting is far too important to leave to amateurs and require around-the-clock supervision by experts in a proper setting chosen by the state, with visitation rights granted to the birth parents.

A generation after that, government studies will show that children with specific genes and other markers make better (read: more docile) citizens and breeding permits will be required, in the interests of "the children," of course.

Reader_iam bringing up that earlier discussion caused me to think of the more recent one about trans-fats. In the end, not much difference between the two ideas" "We're the self-appointed experts. We know what's best for you and you will follow our orders. Until we reverse them."

It probably goes without saying that this all rather Orwellian, so I should apologize for mentioning it (but I won't).

My objection to the tenor of this government initiative aside, of course exposure to language, and to music (some forms more than others) as an extension/supporter of language acquisition is extremely important. Not for a second would I argue otherwise.

The FASBOS and other social engineering edicts in the UK are wonderful news! I hope there are more of such social engineering edicts. The trans-fat edict in NYC is a good example of how these new edicts are crossing the Atlantic. Absolutely superb!

And when the edicts continue to rise to take the shape of a monumental tower of state intervention into every aspect of life, then we'll be on the verge of having it collapse of its own self (if a tower of edicts can have a "self").

If it is the duty of the government to prevent people from harming the body by what is ingested (e.g. tobacco, alcohol, trans fats), surely there can be no objection to the state limiting those activities that might also result in harm, and costs to the public purse. Riding a motorcycle, skydiving and rock climbing come to mind. Similarly, why not prevent people with HIV from having sex and risking transmission?.

Further, if the government demands the right to determine what the human body can or cannot consume, there is no good reason to limit its interest in the effects of media on behavior and the human mind. In order to reduce health costs and prevent harm to society, preventing people from reading bad books or advertisements, listening to bad music or speeches and watching bad TV shows or movies should quite reasonably fall under the purview of the state. And why not?

However, liberty entails the freedom to make mistakes and to choose differently than your betters, so a society that demands certain songs be sung by parents is no longer a democracy by any means, but an authoritarian state.[HT: von Mises]

It appears that PM Blair never read anything about The Cultural Revolution or the Khmer Rouge and Year Zero. This sort of thing always always always ends badly.

When I was a kid, there used to be a joke Brits told about American politics. It went: "America has two political parties. The Republicans, who are very much like our Conservative Party, and the Democrats, who are also very much like our Conservative Party.

Who's the joke on now? It might accurately be said that in Britain, there are three political parties, and all of them are very much like our Democratic Party. Choose your preferred flavor of grim, totalitarian leftie dogma.

I agree with Plato: Music has a profound influence on the development of young children, and its choice and presentation is far too important to be left to any other than the State.

It's obvious that all modern pop and rock music is a trashy hubub. The whole edifice of popular music as it has evolved for the past 100 years simply won't be allowed in the Republic that's coming. The Guardians will appoint only instructors trained in music that will inspire useful attitudes toward the common good. Music that promotes private pleasure, intellectual activity unrelated to the strengthening of the Republic, or religion deemed inimical to the secular interests of the State, will be severely proscribed. Private music is a contradition in terms and will be unthinkable in this new Republic.

An updated version of Plato's modes suitable for the modern world will be prepared. They will be enforced when the Guardians finally take control, and the United States is replaced by that ideal Republic for which so many seem to yearn.

Let's not forget the stories. Like Little Black Sambo, and all those stories with witches! Oops, we'll have to change "witch" to "earth feminine goddess worshipper."

We'd put on dad's old 78s and play them and sing and dance. To the Al Jolson ones, we'd put mom's mudpack on our faces as blackface.

The UK has gone off the deep end. The natural British tendency to nosing in and gossipping and conformity to the bland has found its hero in gummint: Tony Blair. I think of the Monty Python ladies.

You should add the Samizdata blog to your reading list to experience the full horror.

Know what else goes on in the UK? School lunchroom ladies check every kids' lunch and CONFISCATE unhealthy food! That would never fly in Amurrica. I can imagine the parents around here picketing at the principals office demanding that heads roll.

Don't listen to me. I'm highly irresponsible; I let children watch the Simpsons.

Here's another nanny state thing that burns my bippie. Our public schools (in my region) require that any students participating in extracurricular activities or driving to school must consent to random drug testing.

WTF? Training up the young'uns to be accustomed to baseless intrusions by government into their private lives?

I'm not a parent. If I were, I would have my kid partipate/drive, and refuse parental consent for random drug testing. (If they have suspicions with grounds, call me, then I'll deal with it.) I'd get all legal on their @$$. I find this heinous.

What if my parents didn't read me nursery rhymes, but instead taught me to read when I was 3 and then gave me a book of nursery rhymes to keep me company? (True story!) ...I seem to have turned out okay, though I *did* major in science. Perhaps if I'd had the nursery rhymes I would've been a liberal arts type.